panelica_databases_post_v1_databases

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds "Mutating: changes server state" and the required scope "databases:write", which are useful, but it does not describe what happens on success, what fields are required, or any side effects beyond creation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by structured metadata. Some redundancy exists with the tool name and annotations, but the format is clean and scannable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a mutating create operation with an opaque request body and no output schema. The description provides no field names, required properties, examples, validation rules, or response expectations, making it impossible for an agent to invoke correctly without external API documentation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single body parameter, and the body description at least states it is application/json. However, the body schema is explicitly not statically declared, and the tool description adds no field-level semantics or examples, so the agent still cannot construct a valid payload.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb and resource: "Create database" for POST /v1/databases. This distinguishes it from database read/delete/grant operations, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides metadata such as required scopes and mutation status, but gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and one-line purpose.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.